TRANSPORT

Light Dues

David Jamieson: I am pleased to announce that for 2004–05 light dues rates will be reduced from 40p to 39p per ton and that the tonnage cap will be reduced from 40,000 tons to 35,000 tons.
	The Government remain committed to a cost recovery system yet rates have been reduced significantly in the last 11 years. They were last reduced in 2002. Much of the credit for being able to sustain these charges must go to the General Lighthouse Authorities—Trinity House Lighthouse Service, the Northern Lighthouse Board and the Commissioners of Irish Lights—that continue to maintain high standards while keeping costs down.
	The final report of the Economic Study of the Impact of Light Dues is nearing completion. The consultants, MDS Transmodal and DTZ Pieda have undertaken a wide-ranging review of statistical and economic evidence and interviewed a number of interests. The completion of the report has been put back to take account of suggestions and information received from industry representatives. We expect the report to be published in the next few weeks. An announcement concerning the Government's reaction to the report and proposed next steps will be made after we have fully considered the report and heard the views of stakeholders.

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

Television Licence Fees

Tessa Jowell: On 11 November 2003, Official Report, column 11WS, the Government announced that, from 1 April 2004, the fee for a colour television licence would rise to £121 and the black and white licence fee to £40.50.1 will today lay before the House the regulations necessary to bring these new fees into force.
	The new regulations also:
	Incorporate the 50 per cent. licence fee concession for blind persons originally introduced by the Secretary of State's determination under section 2(2) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949, dated 31 March 2000.
	Incorporate provision for free television licences for persons aged 75 and over, originally introduced by the Secretary of State's direction to the BBC under section 1(2) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949, dated 30 October 2000.
	Define "television receiver" for the purposes of the requirement to have a TV licence under Part 4 of the Communications Act 2003.
	Define "television dealer" and "television set" for the purposes of Part 1 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967 (which imposes upon television dealers an obligation to notify the BBC, as the authority responsible for TV licensing, of the sale or hire of a television set).
	Amend the definition of "accommodation for residential care" for England, Wales and Scotland to reflect changes in the care homes legislation; clarify the definition of certain expressions relating to this concession and provide that a group of dwellings may be within the definition of "a group of specially provided dwellings" even if one of the dwellings is occupied by a caretaker.
	Clarify the operation of the easy payment schemes.
	Amend the definition of "hotel", for the purposes of television licence fees for hotels, to impose a maximum stay for guests of 28 days in any consecutive period.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Offshore Licence

Stephen Timms: I am pleased to inform the House that I am today offering RWE Dea UK SNS Limited an Oil and Gas Production licence on Seaward Block 43/20c in the Southern North Sea.
	The successful applicant will have a fixed period in which to decide whether or not to accept the offer

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Water Price Limits (Periodic Review)

Margaret Beckett: I have today issued my Principal Guidance to the Director-General of Water Services (Ofwat) on policies affecting the 2004 Periodic Review of water price limits in England. The review will produce price limits, set by Ofwat, for the years 2005–10.
	This guidance is the second public contribution to the 2004 Periodic Review. My Initial Guidance was published in January 2003.
	This Principal Guidance sets out my main decisions and views on a wide range of relevant policies and legal requirements which bear on price limits. It takes account of the information and advice so far to hand, including the proposals and costings put forward by companies in their draft business plans in August 2003, views on these cost estimates from Ofwat, further policy advice from Ofwat and from the other regulators, and the views of customers and other interested parties.
	The main areas for decision by Government now are the drinking water and environment programmes. Previous Periodic Reviews have raised the standards of our drinking water and of water in the environment. It is our policy to continue these improvements, while taking account of the effects on customers' bills.
	Companies' programmes must deliver existing commitments including our EU obligations and other statutory obligations. These will produce very significant benefits to the environment and for customers. I have also selected for inclusion in companies' final business plans and Ofwat's draft price limits, some further programmes that go beyond what is strictly required under EU commitments, and which appear to offer good value for money.
	Two existing long-term programmes to improve customers' drinking water will be completed during the 2005–10 period. One is a programme of improvements to remove contaminants at water treatment works to ensure that they can continue to provide wholesome drinking water supplies. The other is a 20-year programme to replace or reline old, corroding water mains. Work will continue to lower yet further the level of lead in drinking water.
	The programme of environmental improvements to our inland and coastal waters recognises the need to build on the achievements already made and start work towards the demanding future objectives set by the EU Water Framework Directive. But it also stands in its own right and addresses a range of issues including the need to improve further the condition of water and wetland sites of special scientific interest, bring more waters up to the standards required for fresh water fish and improve bathing waters.
	The whole programme must be carried out at the minimum cost to customers. The process of challenge and refining has already substantially reduced the potential programmes. This process has yet some way to go and I would expect costs to be driven down further. My Department will continue to work with the Drinking Water Inspectorate, English Nature and the Environment Agency on how they should translate the guidance into regulatory requirements. I expect those regulators to work with companies to identify how legal commitments and the other policy outcomes specified in this guidance can be delivered by pragmatic cost-effective solutions.
	It is then for Ofwat to challenge the costs that companies need to deliver the requirements of the regulators and the policies in this guidance. I am confident that Ofwat will scrutinise and challenge with equal attention all aspects of companies' costs underlying their business plans, including the costs that companies assign to delivering the commitments and policies set out in this guidance.
	I am also clear that achievement of future water quality standards will require significant action by a much wider range of actors than the water industry, including land mgers as well as others who are responsible for diffuse water pollution. As part of this process, we will be shortly publishing an action plan outlining a full range of options for addressing diffuse pollution from agriculture.
	The policies contained in this guidance are strongly informed by the interests of customers. I am concerned about the effect of water bills, especially on those least able to pay. I will be reviewing the way in which lower income households are helped with their water and sewerage charges.
	My Department will work with the regulators to refine the cost benefit lysis and will also prepare and publish a regulatory impact assessment of the improvement policies in this guidance that go beyond existing commitments and the costs to customers that they imply. These processes will inform the final guidance.
	In the light of companies' final business plans, the draft price limits published by Ofwat and their implications for customers' bills, as well as any further advice from the regulators and the regulatory impact assessment, I shall issue my final guidance in Autumn 2004.

HEALTH

Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration

John Reid: I am responding on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the Thirty-third Report of the Review Body on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration (DDRB) which is published today. Copies of the report are available in the Vote Office and the Library. I am grateful to the chairman and members of the Review Body for their hard work.
	This year's report deals primarily with general dental practitioners, doctors and dentists in training, non-consultant career grade doctors, medical and dental consultants who have chosen not to take up new contracts, and ophthalmic medical practitioners. For consultants taking up new contracts, general medical practitioners and the salaried primary dental care services, 2004–05 will be the second year of three-year pay deals agreed as part of NHS pay reforms.
	The Review Body has recommended with effect from April 2004 general increases in remuneration of 2.7 per cent. for doctors and dentists in training and non-consultant career grade doctors, 2.5 per cent. for consultants who remain on the old contract and an increase of 2.9 per cent. in gross fees for general dental practitioners. The Review Body has also recommended adjustments to some features of the pay scales for associate specialists, staff grade practitioners and specialist registrars and additional funding to support a structured change mgement programme for dentists and their staff.
	The Review Body's pay recommendations are being accepted in full and without staging.

Paroxetine

John Hutton: Following continuing interest in both Houses about the issues surrounding the safety of Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors (SSRIs), including Seroxat (paroxetine), this statement informs the House of further conclusions of the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) based on the work of the Expert Working Group on SSRIs.
	In reviewing clinical trial data on the dosage of paroxetine and prescribing data suggesting that as many as 17,000 patients were started on doses above 20mg in the last year, the Committee concluded that a reminder to prescribers was necessary in the following terms; that
	(i) the starting dose of paroxetine in the treatment of depression should be 20mg, as per the current Summary of Products Characteristics (SPC);
	(ii) there was no evidence from clinical trials of increased efficacy in the treatment of depressive illness above 20mg;
	(iii) the adverse events that occur soon after starting therapy may be difficult to distinguish from the underlying condition. There is evidence that increasing the dose in this situation may be detrimental;
	(iv) rapid upward titration may increase the risk of serious adverse events;
	(v) those currently on a higher dose and responding well to treatment should remain on the same dose and be reviewed at their next regular treatment review;
	(vi) patients should not stop treatment suddenly. Any cessation of treatment should proceed by a gradual downward titration.
	Detailed communications to patients and prescribers are taking place today. These will include a summary of clinical trial data on which the conclusions of the CSM and its Expert Group are based. This has been placed in the Library, and is available on the MHRA web-site.
	The Expert Working Group will continue its work to conclude their full review of the safety and efficacy of SSRIs and will examine what implications, if any, these latest findings have for the use of other SSRIs.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Professional Conduct Committee

Phil Hope: In July 2003, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister consulted a number of professional organisations on a draft Statutory Instrument providing for the enlargement of the membership of the above Committee and amending the rules concerning its quorum. The responses to that consultation have now been lysed, and an amended Statutory Instrument was laid before Parliament yesterday.
	The amendments to the draft Statutory Instrument are only minor and the effect remains that the pool of PCC members will be enlarged by seven additional persons. The Statutory Instrument will come into effect on 1 April 2004.
	A number of consultees made other points concerning the Board, and one organisation requested a setting up of a Parliamentary Committee to investigate certain matters about the Board and its work. I have considered all of the representations received and have met the Chairman and other members of the Board to discuss. I have full confidence in the Board and the way it operates under the powers given in the Architects Act 1997 and have concluded that there is no need to set up such an inquiry.